COURT ORDERS FOREIGN CURRENCY TRADING PONZI SCHEMER TO PAY $10 MILLION

FROM:  U.S. COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION
Federal Court in Georgia Orders over $10 Million in Sanctions against Defendant Eldon A. Gresham in Forex Ponzi Scheme
Relief defendants Werner H. Beiersdoerfer and Interveston Wines, LLC ordered to pay an additional $5 million in relief.
Washington, DC - The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) obtained federal court summary judgment orders resolving its claims against defendant Eldon A. Gresham (aka Eldon A. Gresham, Jr.)doing business as The Gresham Company (Gresham) of Peachtree City, Ga., and relief defendants Werner H. Beiersdoerfer (Beiersdoefer) and his company, Interveston Wines, LLC (Interveston), both of Calera, Ala.

The claims arose from a CFTC complaint filed July 2, 2009, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia that charged Gresham with operating a multi-million dollar off-exchange foreign currency (forex) Ponzi scheme.   Beiersdoerfer and Interveston were named in the lawsuit as relief defendants because they allegedly received funds as a result of Gresham’s conduct to which they had no legitimate entitlement.  

The summary judgment order entered against Gresham on September 9, 2011, found that, from 2004 to 2009, Gresham fraudulently solicited $15,900,245.97 from over 100 customers for the purported purpose of trading forex.  According to the order, Gresham lured customers and prospective customers with promises of extraordinary monthly returns ranging from five to 10 percent and perpetuated his scheme by falsely reporting substantial gains to customers.  The court further found that Gresham engaged in only limited, unsuccessful forex trading and that Gresham misappropriated the vast majority of customer funds to pay “returns” to other customers and for personal use.

The court’s order imposes a civil monetary penalty of $8,131,362.90 against Gresham.  In addition, the order permanently bars Gresham from engaging in any commodity-related activity, including trading, and from registering with the CFTC in any capacity.  On May 9, 2012, the court amended the earlier order to require Gresham to pay $2,710,454.30 in disgorgement to his defrauded customers.  

On May 7, 2012, the court entered an order of summary judgment against relief defendants Beiersdoerfer and Interveston upon finding that neither had a legitimate ownership interest in the “returns” that Gresham paid to them from the investments of others.  The court’s order requires Beiersdoerfer and Interveston to pay a combined total of $5,208,151.45 in disgorgement to Gresham customers.

The CFTC thanks the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Georgia and the Fort Worth Division of the U.S. Postal Inspection Service for their assistance.
Gresham is currently awaiting trial on mail fraud charges in a related criminal action filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas.

CFTC Division of Enforcement staff members responsible for this case are Rachel Hayes, Margaret Aisenbrey, Stephen Turley, Charles Marvine, Rick Glaser, and Richard Wagner.

USS MISSISSIPPI SAILORS WORK WITH RED CROSS IN PASCAGOULA MISSISSIPPI

FROM:  U.S. NAVY
Photo:  U.S. Mississippi.  Credit:  U.S. Navy
PCU Mississippi Sailors Volunteer with American Red Cross in Pascagoula
By Lt. Cmdr. Jennifer Cragg, Commander, Submarine Group 2 Public Affairs
PASCAGOULA, Miss. (NNS) -- Sailors from Pre-Commissioning Unit (PCU) Mississippi (SSN 782) volunteered with the American Red Cross in Pascagoula and packed hurricane preparedness materials May 30.

PCU Mississippi Sailors assisted the American Red Cross in advance of the kick-off to hurricane season, which begins June 1 and runs through Nov. 30.

PCU Mississippi, the ninth Virginia-class attack submarine, arrived in Pascagoula May 25 to prepare for the submarine's commissioning June 2.

In addition to assisting with the American Red Cross, PCU Mississippi Sailors also lent their assistance to Habitat for Humanity May 29.

Capt. John McGrath, PCU Mississippi's commanding officer, emphasized his crew's interest in assisting in volunteer projects while the submarine was in Pascagoula for its commissioning.

"PCU Mississippi Sailors amassed nearly a thousand volunteer hours while the boat was under construction," said McGrath. "It was only fitting for my crew to do the same while we are visiting our namesake state."

Due to their extensive volunteerism the submarine received a Navy Community Service/Project Good Neighbor community service award in 2011.

Martha Duvall, American Red Cross communications officer, South Mississippi was pleased with the Sailors' support.

"We are excited and honored to have crew members from the USS Mississippi help assemble Red Cross emergency shelter kits," said Duvall.

Duvall added that the kits will be used throughout South Mississippi this hurricane season.

"Their volunteerism today will allow us to continue to be ready if and when called upon to open shelters," said Duvall.

Virginia-class submarines are built under a unique teaming arrangement between General Dynamics Electric Boat and Huntington Ingalls Industries - Newport News. Construction on the submarine began in February 2007.

Once commissioned in 2012, Mississippi, like all Virginia-class submarines is designed to dominate both the littorals and deep oceans. It will serve as a valuable asset in supporting the core capabilities of Maritime Strategy: Sea control, power projection, forward presence, maritime security and deterrence. PCU Mississippi will be commissioned June 2 in Pascagoula, Miss.

AIR FORCE MOVE IN ALASKA SAVES MONEY IN MANPOWER AND EFFICIENCY

Photos F16 Right and F22 Below.  Credit:  U.S. Air Force 
FROM:  U.S. AIR FORCE
Pacific Air Forces releases report on Alaska F-16 squadron move 


5/31/2012 - JOINT BASE PEARL HARBOR-HICKAM, Hawaii  -- Pacific Air Forces today released a report on the Air Force's plan to move people and aircraft associated with the 18th Aggressor Squadron from Eielson AFB near Fairbanks, Alaska, to Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, near Anchorage, 
Alaska.

Pacific Air Forces led a 26-member Site Activation Task Force (SATAF) team which traveled to both installations in April to study the overall impact of the F-16 squadron move scheduled for FY13. The team validated that, after an initial outlay of $5.6 million in FY13, the move will result in manpower savings of 81 military positions and cost savings of $14.6 million over the next five years, through a combination of manpower and efficiency savings generated by consolidating operations and maintenance supervision overhead and base support functions.


The relocation is one part of the Air Force's fiscal year 2013 force structure adjustments, which are designed to save approximately $8.7 billion of the Air Force's $54 billion share of savings across the Future Years Defense Plan. The SATAF report specifically details actions needed to move the Aggressors in FY13 and details planning and incidental costs associated with this action.


Eielson hosts the only wing in the active duty Air Force that has only a single operational squadron. In addition to expected cost savings, this move would lead to more efficient operations by locating the F-16 Aggressor aircraft with their primary customers, the F-22 Raptors at JBER. The F-16 Aggressors will retain the capability to operate from Eielson during exercises and as otherwise needed.


"Eielson Air Force Base is, and will continue to be, a valuable strategic location as part of the Total Force," said Brig. Gen. Mark McLeod, Director of Logistics, Pacific Air Forces, and SATAF team lead. "The base will remain the home station for the Alaska Air National Guard's 168th Air Refueling Wing and will provide critical training through the Joint Pacific Alaska Range Complex supporting major joint training exercises such as Red Flag, Distant Frontier and Northern Edge." 


In addition to the savings generated from the F-16 squadron move, the Air Force expects there will be additional savings based on proposed base operating support manpower adjustments in FY15. The estimated follow-on cost savings are projected to be approximately $90 million per year beginning in FY16, and $227 million across the FYDP. These savings are based on eliminating 749 military and 179 civilian manpower authorizations that analysis determined would no longer be needed at Eielson once the remaining infrastructure and support functions are adjusted after the Aggressor Squadron's relocation. Savings resulting from the base operating support adjustments in FY15 will be further refined in future SATAFs. 

ST. JUDE MEDICAL INC. PAYS $3.65 MILLION TO SETTLE CLAIMS OF OVERCHARGES

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Thursday, May 31, 2012
Minnesota-based St. Jude Medical Pays U.S. $3.65 Million to Settle Claims That It Overcharged for Implantable Cardiac Devices St. Jude Medical Inc. has agreed to pay the United States $3.65 million to resolve civil allegations under the False Claims Act that the company inflated the cost of replacement pacemakers and defibrillators purchased by the Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs, the Justice Department announced today. St. Paul, Minn.-based St. Jude Medical develops, manufactures and distributes cardiovascular and implantable neurostimulation medical devices.
         
The settlement resolves allegations that St. Jude actively marketed its pacemakers and defibrillators by touting the generous credits available should a device need to be replaced while covered under warranty.   At the same time, St. Jude allegedly knew that it failed to grant appropriate credits to the purchasers of devices in a large number of cases where a product was replaced while still under warranty.   As a result, the United States contended that St. Jude submitted invoices to Department of Veterans Affairs hospitals and Department of Defense military treatment facilities that overstated the cost for replacement pacemakers or defibrillators.

“As medical device use becomes more prevalent, it is essential that device manufactures provide federal health care programs with the warranty discounts they are entitled to receive,” said Stuart F. Delery, Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department’s Civil Division.   “If medical device manufacturers are actively concealing warranty credits from the government, the department will use all the tools at its disposal to hold them accountable.”

“Like any other customer, the government is entitled to get what it paid for,” said Carmen M. Ortiz, U.S. Attorney for the District of Massachusetts.   “Where a vendor warrants that its products will last a certain amount of time and then does not honor warranty claims when the products fail early, actions like this are appropriate.”
The civil settlement resolves allegations initially brought by two whistleblowers in federal court in the District of Massachusetts under the qui tam, or whistleblower, provisions of the False Claims Act, which allow for private citizens to bring civil actions on behalf of the United States and share in any recovery.   As part of today’s resolution, the whistleblowers will receive $730,000 from the settlement amount.

 “The Department of Veterans Affairs, Office of Inspector General continues with its partners at the U.S. Attorney’s Office and other federal investigative agencies to combat fraud, waste, and abuse within the health care industry,” said Jeffrey G. Hughes, Special Agent in Charge, Department of Veterans Affairs, Office of Inspector General.  “This civil settlement will return funds to VA to benefit our nation’s veterans.”

“The Defense Criminal Investigative Service is committed to working with the U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Office of Inspector General, to ensure that taxpayer dollars are properly spent and that the health care needs of our military members and their families are met,” said Edward Bradley, Special Agent-in-Charge, Defense Criminal Investigative Service, Northeast Field Office.   “Today’s settlement demonstrates the importance of this collaborative effort to hold companies accountable when they fail to honor warranty discounts to which the U.S. Department of Defense is entitled.”

The settlement was the result of an investigation by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Massachusetts, the Justice Department’s Civil Division, and the Offices of Inspector General at the U.S. Department of Defense and Veterans Affairs.   The claims settled by this agreement are allegations only, and there has been no determination of liability.

ALLEGED ROMANIAN CREDIT CARD HACKER EXTRADITED TO THE U.S.

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Tuesday, May 29, 2012
Romanian National Extradited to U.S. to Face Charges for Allegedly Participating in Multimillion Dollar Scheme to Hack into and Steal Credit Card Data from U.S. Merchants

WASHINGTON – Adrian-Tiberiu Oprea, 28, of Constanta, Romania, was extradited to the United States and appeared in federal court in New Hampshire today, to face federal charges relating to his alleged participation in an international multimillion dollar scheme to remotely hack into and steal payment card data from hundreds of U.S. merchants’ “point of sale” computer systems, announced Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division and U.S. Attorney John P. Kacavas of the District of New Hampshire.

In a four-count indictment unsealed on Dec. 6, 2011, Oprea, along with three other Romanian nationals, Iulian Dolan, Cezar Iulian Butu and Florin Radu, were charged with conspiracy to commit computer fraud, conspiracy to commit wire fraud and conspiracy to commit access device fraud.  Oprea was extradited to the United States on May 25, 2012.  He was arrested on Dec. 1, 2011, in Romania and remained in custody there prior to his extradition.  Dolan and Butu were arrested upon their entry into the United States on Aug. 13 and Aug. 14, 2011, respectively, and remain in United States custody.  Radu remains at large.

According to the indictment, from approximately 2008 until May 2011, Oprea, Dolan, Butu and Radu conspired to remotely hack into more than 200 U.S.-based merchants’ point-of-sale (POS) or “checkout” computer systems in order to steal customers’ credit, debit and gift card numbers and associated data (collectively referred to as “credit card data”).  A POS system allows merchants to process customer purchases, including those made using credit, debit and gift cards, and typically includes a computer, monitor,
integrated credit card processing system, signature capture device and a customer pin pad device.  Merchant victims include more than 150 Subway restaurant franchises located throughout the United States, including in the District of New Hampshire, as well as more than 50 other identified retailers.  According to the indictment, members of the conspiracy have compromised the credit card data of more than 80,000 customers, and millions of dollars of unauthorized purchases have been made using the compromised data.

If convicted, each defendant faces a maximum sentence of five years in prison for the conspiracy to commit computer fraud charge and for each conspiracy to commit access device fraud charge and 20 years in prison for conspiracy to commit wire fraud charge.  They also face up to three years of supervised release, a fine of up to twice the amount of the fraud loss, and restitution.

The case was investigated by the U.S. Secret Service and is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Arnold H. Huftalen of the District of New Hampshire and Trial Attorney Mona Sedky of the Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section in the Justice Department’s Criminal Division.  The Office of International Affairs in the Justice Department’s Criminal Division provided substantial assistance.  The department would like to thank Subway for its cooperation.

The charges contained in the indictment are allegations.  The defendants are presumed to be innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

REDUCING ASTHMA RATES AND CONTROLLING PROBLEM AMONG RACIAL AND ETHNIC MINORITIES

Photo Credit:  Wikimedia 
FROM:  U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Obama Administration Working to Close Racial, Ethnic Gap on Asthma
Asthma disproportionately affects minority children, children living below poverty level
WASHINGTON – Today U.S. federal agencies unveiled the Coordinated Federal Action Plan to Reduce Racial and Ethnic Asthma Disparities. White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) Chair Nancy Sutley, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lisa P. Jackson, Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) Kathleen Sebelius and Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Shaun Donovan discussed the new plan during an event at Town Hall Education Arts Recreation Campus (THEARC), which houses The Boys and Girls Club of Greater Washington along with other community groups.

Nearly 26 million Americans are affected by this chronic respiratory disease, including 7 million children, especially minority children and children with family incomes below the poverty level. Asthma rates of African American children are currently at 16 percent, while 16.5 percent of Puerto Rican children suffer from the chronic respiratory disease, more than double the rate of Caucasian children in the United States. The annual economic cost of asthma, including direct medical costs from hospital stays and indirect costs such as lost school and work days, amounts to approximately $56 billion.

“Across America we see low-income and minority children and families at a disproportionately higher risk for asthma and respiratory illnesses. Air pollution and other challenges are having serious health effects, which compound economic challenges through medical bills and missed school and work days,” said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. “As the mother of a child with asthma, I know what it means for our children to have clean and healthy air to breathe. This Action Plan enables federal agencies and our partners to work more collaboratively and comprehensively on tackling a major health threat, so that we can protect all Americans, no matter what community they call home.”

“Low-income and minority communities often face an unacceptable burden of pollution in this country, diminishing their economic potential and threatening the health of millions of American families,” said Nancy Sutley, Chair of the White House Council on Environmental Quality. “As we close National Asthma Awareness Month today, the President’s Administration is standing behind his commitment to integrating environmental justice into the missions of federal agencies, promoting clean air and healthy communities, and ensuring this really is a country of equal opportunity for all.”

“The report is a blueprint for how we can work together to reduce asthma disparities and help ensure children with asthma get the right care with the right support,” said Secretary Sebelius. “One key factor that is so critical to controlling a child’s asthma is access to health care. Uninsured people with asthma are less likely to take the preventive medicine they may need to keep their condition under control, making them more likely to suffer an attack. That’s why we are focused on expanding access to care.”

HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan said, “The numbers don’t lie: Asthma disproportionately impacts low-income minority families which is why we must do everything we can to ensure all children have a healthy place to call home. Today’s announcement will help the federal government support the development of innovative new approaches to improve and control asthma.”

The action plan will coordinate efforts to improve asthma management and prevention:
Reduce barriers to asthma care: Ensure that the populations most severely impacted by asthma receive evidence-based comprehensive care, which includes access to medical services, education and environmental interventions.

Build local capacity: Enhance capacity to deliver integrated, community-based asthma care systems.
Target services: Identify the children, families and communities most impacted by asthma disparities.
Accelerate prevention efforts: Increase understanding of the cause or causes of asthma and test interventions that may prevent the onset of asthma.

COMMENTS AT THE RUSSI MISSILE DEFENSE CONVERENCE

Photo:  Missile Tracking System.  From:  U.S. Air Force.
FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Missile Defense Conference
Remarks Ellen Tauscher
Special Envoy for Strategic Stability and Missile Defense 2012 RUSI Missile Defense Conference
London, United Kingdom
May 30, 2012
Thank you, Michael, for that kind introduction.
I am honored to be back here, at RUSI, speaking about my favorite topic, missile defense. I particularly appreciate this year’s program where I get to speak first.
Last year, as many of you may recall, I was the last speaker, which is tough when you follow so many renowned experts in the field. Going first is much easier, so thank you.
Let me acknowledge some of my colleagues that are in attendance today. Without their support and cooperation, much of the progress we have made on these issues would not have been possible.

I want to acknowledge Bogdan Aurescu, who will speak to this group a little later. It was a tremendous honor to work with him so closely in Romania.
I also want to mention Ambassador Daalder and Madelyn Creedon.
Madelyn and I did a similar routine at the Moscow missile defense conference earlier this month.

This conference is particularly well timed, coming just one week after the NATO Summit in Chicago. Instead of just giving my typical Monday, Wednesday, Friday missile defense speech, I would like to discuss some of the areas where we still need to make progress on missile defense.

Let me start with the recent announcement at Chicago of an “interim missile defense capability.”

The progress on missile defense is remarkable given that NATO only made its decision to develop a territorial ballistic missile defense capability 18 months ago. In that year-and-a-half period, the United States and our NATO Allies have achieved an operationally significant peacetime ballistic missile defense capability.

That means that NATO now has its first missile defense radar, its first interceptors, a single commander, and a NATO command and control system for ballistic missile defense.

This progress was only possible because our NATO Allies embraced President Obama’s European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA), which is focused on protecting our European allies and deployed U.S. forces against the existing ballistic missile threats.

It has been a great privilege for me to have worked so closely with all of our Allies over the last couple of years to reach this point, especially my colleagues in Poland, Romania, Spain, and Turkey.

Because of their support and leadership, for which we are incredibly grateful, we were able to reach agreement on the basing of our missile defense assets in Europe.
As you know, last September, we made three big announcements.
First, Turkey agreed to host the Phase 1 ANTPY-2 radar.

Second, we signed the Ballistic Missile Defense Agreement with Romania to host the Phase 2 land-based SM-3 site.

Third, the U.S.-Poland agreement for the Phase 3 land-based site entered into force as well.
And then a few weeks later in early October, Spain agreed to serve as a home port for four Aegis destroyers.

As we like to say in the United States, that’s not bad for government work.
We also appreciate the other contributions by our NATO Allies to this effort. Our NATO Allies will contribute more than $1 billion dollars in NATO Common Funding to the ALTBMD command and control system. The Netherlands has indicated that it will spend close to 250 million Euros to modify the radars on its frigates to detect and track ballistic missiles at long ranges and contribute its Patriot missiles to NATO missile defense.
Germany is also exploring developing an airborne infrared sensor. France has proposed a concept for a shared early warning satellite. There is much that our allies can contribute to NATO’s developing missile defense system.

Of course, the announcement in Chicago is just an initial but important step in implementing NATO’s territorial ballistic missile defense capability.
The Obama Administration is committed to working with NATO on these efforts and deploying all four phases of the EPAA as our voluntary national contribution.
For our part, much work remains to be done on the systems that the United States will deploy as potential contributions to NATO missile defense, but considerable work has already begun.

Just look at the President’s budget request for fiscal year 2013.
Even in a constrained budget environment, the United States has protected the funding for the European Phased Adaptive Approach.

These actions are a clear demonstration of the United Sates’ continued commitment to European security and our Article 5 obligations. At the same time as we are working with our NATO Allies, there is a tremendous opportunity to develop a meaningful strategic partnership with Russia in the area of missile defense cooperation.

Missile defense cooperation can achieve two very important objectives. First, it would allow Russia to see with its own eyes what we are doing on missile defense and it will give us time to demonstrate how our systems operate.

It will allow Russia to see that the European Phased Adaptive Approach is not directed against Russia, but limited regional threats from outside of Europe… not Russia.
Second, it could give the United States, NATO, and Russia the opportunity to forge a true strategic partnership that enhances security for all.

I realize it takes time to build confidence. But, we have that time. Russia has expressed concerns about our plans for Phases 3 and 4 of the EPAA.

There are six years before we deploy Phase 3 in the 2018 timeframe. We should use that time positively on cooperation and not confrontation.

Russia should come inside the missile defense cooperation tent and see what we are doing.
During that time, we will be testing an Aegis BMD site in Hawaii. We will be developing and testing the SM-3 Block IIA and IIB interceptors.

Russia has also observed our intercept tests in the past and the invitation to observe a future test still stands.

We will also be working with our NATO Allies to ensure how to best protect NATO European populations and territory.
At the same time, the U.S., NATO and Russia can work together on a broad range of cooperation: Sharing sensor data, working on developing common pre-planned responses, conducting a joint analysis of missile defense systems, and working together on missile defense exercises.

The United States and NATO have been transparent about our missile defense programs.
We have provided Russia with a number of ideas and approaches for transparency and we are also committed to discussing other approaches to building confidence between our two countries.

At Chicago, NATO Allies made a very clear statement of our intent. NATO declared in the Chicago Summit Declaration “…the NATO missile defense in Europe will not undermine strategic stability. NATO missile defense is not directed against Russia and will not undermine Russia’s strategic deterrence capabilities.”

And, as I have told my Russian colleagues, if Russia doesn’t like what it has learned throughout this period of cooperation, then it can terminate cooperation at any point.
But that means getting Russia inside the missile defense tent now, working alongside the U.S. and NATO, while we are in the initial phases of deploying this capability. It will take time and effort to build the trust that is currently lacking on this issue.

But let me be clear. While we can work cooperatively together, we cannot agree to the pre-conditions outlined by the Russian Government.

We are committed to deploying effective missile defenses to protect the U.S. homeland and our Allies and partners around the world from the proliferation of ballistic missiles.
We will not agree to limitations on the capabilities and numbers of our missile defense systems.

We cannot agree to any “military-technical criteria,” that would, in effect, limit our ability to develop and deploy future missile defense systems that will protect us against regional threats such as Iran and North Korea.

If we can work together on European missile defense, and make this a subject for cooperation rather than competition, that would be a game-changer for our security relationship.

We understand that there are risks involved, and it takes courage to move away from familiar ways and long-held positions. We believe those risks are manageable.
The alternative is competition, something none of us can afford or want.
So we will keep working to see if we can come up with a plan for cooperation.
We will continue to press in the Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Joint Staff channels. We will keep moving forward in the run up to the June G-20 meeting between Presidents Obama and Putin, and we will keep going long after June.

Thank you again for the opportunity to speak here at this impressive gathering of experts. I look forward to answering any questions you might have.

SECRETARY OF STATE CLINTON SENDS BEST WISHES ON ITALY'S NATIONAL DAY

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE

On the Occasion of Italy's National Day

Press Statement

Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State

Washington, DC

June 1, 2012

On behalf of President Obama and the people of the United States, I am delighted to send best wishes to the people of Italy as you celebrate your national day this June 2. I send my deepest condolences to the family and friends of those who lost their lives in Tuesday’s earthquake. The United States stands by the Italian people as you rebuild and recover.

As we look forward to 2013 as the Year of Italian Culture in the United States, we reflect on the history and shared values that have bound our nations and peoples over the centuries. Americans have long been drawn to Italy to marvel at the art, admire the antiquities, and rediscover their heritage. For years, Italian-Americans have enriched and enlivened American culture in ways large and small.

Our two countries are working together for the future peace and prosperity of our world. As you celebrate this special day with the warmth of good food, family, and friends, know that the United States stands with you.

SECRETARY OF STATE CLINTON'S REMARKS WITH DANISH FOREIGN MINISTER

FROM:  U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
Remarks With Danish Foreign Minister Villy Sovndal
Remarks Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State Eigtveds Pakhus
Copenhagen, Denmark
May 31, 2012
FOREIGN MINISTER SOVNDAL: Yes. Hello and welcome. First of all, I would like to welcome you to Copenhagen. It’s been a pleasure. I’m very happy to be able to return hospitality and generosity you showed when I was in Washington just before Christmas. Thank you very much for that.

And it’s a great pleasure to receive Secretary of State Hillary Clinton here in Copenhagen. One important thing for Secretary Clinton’s visit here will be green growth and the potential for a green transition of our economies. I believe that Denmark has a lot to offer in that regard, and the importance of the United States is hard to overrate. This theme means a lot to both of us.

We had a very fruitful meeting where we discussed a wide range of shared policy priorities. I would like to briefly mention a few of the main items we discussed.

First of all, we had a very frank discussion about Afghanistan. Following up on the NATO Summit, which the United States successfully hosted in Chicago just a few weeks ago, I believe I speak on behalf of both of us when I say that there is a need of realism regarding the prospects for Afghanistan. Transition in Afghanistan is a bumpy road; that’s no secret. But the transition is moving forward, and it will complete by the end of 2014. It is vital that we enable the Afghans to take over full responsibility for their security. I’m therefore very encouraged to note that we have already secured substantial long-term contribution for the Afghan National Security Force, and that was not least a result of the very close cooperation we had between our two countries leading up to Chicago.

We also had an excellent discussion regarding our mutual efforts to help stabilize the Horn of Africa, Libya, and the Sahel region. We agreed on strengthening the U.S.-Danish partnership to prevent and counter terrorism in East Africa. A key focus area will be to prevent the financing of terrorism. We also agreed on the need to strengthen respect for human rights and the rule of law in our effort to counter terrorism. We will launch a joint project focusing on states moving towards democratic governance, including the countries in North Africa. Moreover, we will also jointly provide support for an observation mission to monitor the upcoming elections in Libya. We stand committed to assisting the Libyans in their efforts towards securing a peaceful and democratic future for their elections.

Finally, we discussed the potential for stronger cooperation on promoting green growth. The backdrop of our discussion was the Rio+20 conference on sustainable development, which is just a few weeks ahead. Later today, a strong bilateral green partnership will be kicked off here in Copenhagen. I hope this can also be a driver for an increased investment in trade.

Secretary of State, we must – we meet frequently in different locations around the world. I’m therefore very pleased to be able to receive you here in Copenhagen, so to say, on home ground. I very much appreciate our sincere, frank cooperation, and I hope you’ll enjoy not only this visit, but don’t be shy to come back here once again if you want.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Minister Sovndal, thank you so much for your warm welcome. It is indeed a pleasure to be back here in Copenhagen. This is my first stop on a trip that will take me to several European countries over the next week to underscore America’s commitment to our transatlantic allies and our shared values. You are, after all, our partners of first resort. And together, we are facing the challenges of a complex, dangerous, and fast-moving world. And I’m particularly grateful for Denmark’s leadership in the area of humanitarian and development assistance as well as the staunch contributions to our shared security.

The friendship between our two countries dates back more than two centuries and the bonds between our people have endured over that time. Our commitment to democracy, to human rights, to human dignity is core to all of us. And this morning I had the great privilege of speaking with a group of Danish young people about the kind of future that we hope awaits them.

We had a very productive lunch, talked through a range of issues as the minister has said, because after all we are working together on matters ranging from nuclear proliferation in Iran to global food security.

Regarding Afghanistan I thanked the foreign minister for the leadership of the Danish Government and the sacrifices made by the Danish people, in particular your extraordinary soldiers. Danish soldiers have fought valiantly alongside American and allied forces. And as we prepare for the transition in 2014, when the Afghans themselves will take full responsibility for their own security, Denmark has responded by generously committing to supporting the Afghan National Security Forces after the transition and calling on other nations to do the same through its Coalition of Committed Contributors initiative.

As we look toward the donors’ summit in Tokyo in July, Denmark will continue to play a leading role in helping the Afghan people make progress in governance, on education, healthcare, and other indices of development. Denmark’s commitment to new democracies extends far beyond Afghanistan and into the Middle East and North Africa, where it has pledged money in assistance and working to spark economic growth, especially in the private sector. And I expressed our gratitude for the leadership once again that Denmark is showing, because it is essential that democracies, especially these very young democracies, deliver tangible results for people.

We of course discussed Denmark’s leadership on climate change and the environment. As an Arctic nation, Denmark knows very well how pressing these issues are. And as climate change progresses, its impact will affect the livelihoods of millions of people who are dependent on this region’s natural resources. Denmark is a strong voice for taking aggressive action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and by leading the charge with your own domestic goal of cutting emissions by 40 percent by 2020. And I want to applaud Denmark’s decision to join the Climate and Clean Air Coalition that will help us reduce the short-lived climate pollutants as well as CO2. That’s an important complement to what is being done with respect to carbon emissions.

For our part, the United States has continued to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. We’ve established new fuel efficiency standards that will be among the most aggressive in the world. We have invested more than $90 billion in clean energy and energy efficiency. We’ve more than doubled our installed capacity of wind and solar in four years. So I’m looking forward to this afternoon’s Green Partnership for Growth event with the prime minister, and I applaud Denmark’s leadership in creating the Global Green Growth Forum, an innovative platform that encourages leaders across governments, the private sector, and civil society to work together.

And finally, let me say a word about Syria. The world looked on last week at the massacre in Houla with horror, and those responsible must be held to account. We and the world have joined in condemning the brutality of the Assad regime. I spoke with Special Envoy Kofi Annan yesterday about his recent visit to Damascus. We are working with Denmark and others to make sure the international community speaks with a unified voice to increase pressure on Assad from both inside and outside. We have to peel away the regime’s continued support within Syria while bolstering our assistance to the opposition and by isolating the regime diplomatically and economically.

So we have a lot of work ahead of us, Minister, and I want to conclude by thanking you again as well as the people of Denmark for your invaluable partnership and leadership. I look forward to our continuing coordination and collaboration, and it is a great pleasure for me to have this opportunity to be here once again. Thank you.

MODERATOR: Thank you. We will now take a few questions. (Inaudible.)

QUESTION: Thank you. Madam Secretary, as you have stated, Denmark has played an important role in different missions around the world – in Iraq, Afghanistan, and recently in Libya. Right now, the situation in Syria is on top of the agenda. If – and that’s my question – if an international coalition could – can be formed, could you then see Denmark take play in such a coalition?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I think we have to take stock of where we are and what is possible. I see Denmark as a contributor to any mission anywhere be it security, be it development, be it humanitarian, because the track record of Danish participation is exemplary. So of course, if there were such an international coalition to do anything to try to alleviate the suffering of the Syrian people, we would certainly reach out as broadly as possible and be consulting closely with the Danish Government.

Right now, we continue to support Kofi Annan and his efforts. And we do so fully aware that thus far Assad has not implemented any of the six points that are part of the Kofi Annan plan. But we also know that the UN observers have performed two important functions. In many of the areas where they are present, violence has gone down. And they serve as independent observers – the eyes of the world, if you will – in reporting back when terrible events like the recent massacres occur to try to cut through the clutter and disinformation coming from the Syrian Government.

We’re also aware that there is still a fear among many elements of the Syrian society and the Syrian Government that as bad as the Assad regime is, it could get worse. And we therefore continue to call upon the business leadership, the religious leadership, the military leadership, those voices within the government that know what is going on is leading to the very outcome they fear most, which is a sectarian civil war, to stand up now and call a halt to further support for this regime.

So we’re nowhere near putting together any kind of coalition other than to alleviate the suffering, which we are all contributing to, but we are working very hard to focus the efforts of those, who like Denmark and the United States, are appalled by what we see going on, to perhaps win over those who still support the regime inside and outside of Syria to see what options are available to us.

QUESTION: Jim Mannion from Agence France Presse. Madam Secretary, again on Syria, at this point with the Russians refusing a budge on Syria and with the country appearing to tip towards civil war, is it now a live option to move beyond the requirement of an explicit UN mandate to some sort of action outside of the UN? Is that something the U.S. is considering? Is that a possibility at this point?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Jim, we consider all contingencies at all time. I mean, we plan against everything in order to be prepared in the event that action is called for. But I can tell you that right now, we are focused on supporting Kofi Annan, reaching out both inside and outside of Syria, bringing together those who are most directly affected, particularly in the region. In the last several days, I’ve had numerous conversations – I will have many more over the next few days – with particular attention paid on – to the Russians. Because the Russians keep telling us they want to do everything they can to avoid a civil war because they believe that the violence would be catastrophic. They often, in their conversations with me, liken it to the equivalent of a very large Lebanese civil war, and they are just vociferous in their claim that they are providing a stabilizing influence.
I reject that. I think they are, in effect, propping up the regime at a time when we should be working on a political transition. So I look forward to working with Kofi Annan, with likeminded nations like Denmark and many others, and with the Russians to see if we can’t get a way forward.

MODERATOR: Oliver.

QUESTION: Oliver Skov with the Danish Broadcasting Corporation. The Danes are very curious and interested in the – in U.S. politics and the upcoming elections. (Laughter.) I was hoping you would comment on the upcoming elections and, on a more personal level, your own role after the elections in November.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, I am, as Secretary of State, out of politics. And that’s a rule that we have in our system, that because I have international responsibilities, I cannot participate in the political process. So for the first time in my adult life, I will not be actively engaged in this election.

Clearly, I anticipate and expect the President to be reelected, and the policies that have been pursued in this Administration to continue. But the voters, as in any democracy, will have the final word on the outcome. But I’m looking forward to working as hard as I can until the end of my tenure as Secretary of State, and then will look forward to some time to collect myself and spend it doing just ordinary things that I very much am looking forward to again, like taking a walk without a lot of company – not that I don’t love seeing you all – but just having the time to set my own schedule and pursue a lot of the interests that I have pursued my entire life, particularly on behalf of women and children.

QUESTION: No politics?

SECRETARY CLINTON: No politics.

MODERATOR: One final question. Brad.

QUESTION: Yes, Brad Klapper from Associated Press. Madam Secretary, there’s been increasing talk in Israel, including yesterday from the defense minister, about unilateral action or interim solution in the West Bank in lieu of progress in the peace process. Would you encourage or discourage unilateral withdrawal by Israel from some land, even if it’s not all the Palestinians seek? And what would the unilateral aspect of such a move mean for the chances of establishing a long-lasting Israeli-Palestinian peace?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, Brad, the United States believes there is no substitute for direct talks between the parties. It is the only route to achieving what has long been not only a Palestinian goal and an American goal, but an Israeli goal, which are two states living side by side in peace and security. We have discouraged unilateral action from both sides, and in fact, we think that this new coalition government in Israel provides the best opportunity in several years to reach such a negotiated agreement. In fact, when the coalition was formed, there were four pillars of agreement, and one of them was pursuing the two-state solution.

So we very much want to encourage the Israelis and the Palestinians to do that, and in fact, they have recently exchanged letters, from President Abbas to President – to Prime Minister Netanyahu, and Prime Minister Netanyahu to President Abbas that have outlined the conditions for dialogue. And in recent weeks, I’ve called both Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Abbas urging them to take this opportunity, to use this new opening that has come about because of the broad coalition that now exists that has pledged itself to pursuing a negotiated resolution. And we’re going to continue to urge them to do so.

We greatly appreciate the role that Jordan has played. King Abdullah of Jordan has been extraordinarily forceful in urging the parties to come to the negotiating table. I spoke with Foreign Minister Nasser Judeh over the weekend about the status of the discussions. So we believe that there is an opportunity for direct negotiations, and we hope it was enhanced by the release of bodies today by the Israelis of Palestinians whom they had either killed or who had been suicide bombers going back many years as a sign of confidence building. But they need to get to the table and start dealing with all the very hard issues we know have to be resolved.

MODERATOR: Thank you very much. We’re out of time.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you.

FOREIGN MINISTER SOVNDAL: Thank you.

U.S.-PERU HOLD ENVIRONMENTAL MEETINGS

Photos:  Peruvian Mask (Left) and Peruvian Art Object (Below).  Credit:  Wikimedia.
FROM:  U.S.  DEPARTMENT OF STATE
United States and Peru Hold Environmental Meetings
Media Note Office of the Spokesperson Washington, DC
May 31, 2012
The Governments of the United States and Peru convened a series of environmental meetings related to the U.S. - Peru Trade Promotion Agreement (PTPA) from May 29-31 in Washington, D.C. The governments also held a public session, providing interested stakeholders with the opportunity to raise issues and ask questions about implementation efforts.

Peru and the United States reviewed the progress that has been made to ensure effective implementation of, and compliance with, the obligations under the Environment Chapter of the PTPA. They highlighted key steps each country has undertaken in the past year to strengthen efforts to provide for high levels of environmental protection and discussed details of an independent secretariat called for under the PTPA to receive and consider submissions claiming that a party is failing to effectively enforce its environmental laws.
Officials discussed progress implementing the Annex on Forest Sector Governance (Annex) of the Environment Chapter of the PTPA, including Peru’s efforts to develop regulations to implement its new Forestry and Wildlife Law and processes to audit and verify timber producers and exporters.

The governments reviewed implementation of the Environmental Cooperation Agreement, in particular the status of cooperative environmental activities under the 2011-2014 Work Program, which focuses primarily on implementing the Annex. They also outlined a process for the coordination of future activities, discussed mechanisms for monitoring and evaluation, and shared experiences about the implementation of environmental cooperation work programs pursuant to other free trade agreements.

GEAR UP PROGRAM WILL PROVIDE $8.7 MILLION FOR LOW-INCOME STUDENT COLLEGE SAVINGS ACCOUNTS

Photo Credit:  Wikimedia
FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Education Department Releases Proposal to Help Thousands of Disadvantaged Students Access College Through Savings Accounts
Project encourages students and families to develop key financial skills and invest in higher education
MAY 31, 2012
The U.S. Department of Education today announced that it will further help thousands of disadvantaged students access higher education through investing in college savings accounts. The College Savings Account Research Demonstration Project will commit $8.7 million of federal GEAR UP funds to support college savings accounts for students participating in the GEAR UP program, which is designed to increase the college readiness of low-income middle school and high school students.

The project will provide about 10,000 high school students with savings accounts as well as counseling to develop smart financial habits. In addition, the project will research the impact of savings accounts on college access and success by comparing the outcomes of students receiving savings accounts with a control group, which will allow the project to inform strategies at the federal, state and local level.

"We believe that savings accounts play a key role in helping all students—especially those from low-income families—access and succeed in college," said U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan. "Empowering disadvantaged students with financial resources and skills will enable them to make smart investments in higher education—and we'll gain valuable knowledge about how to best serve these students in the future."

Initial research suggests students with savings accounts are much more likely to enroll in college than students without one. In fall 2010, Duncan joined the chairmen of the FDIC and National Credit Union Administration in a commitment to increase the number of students with savings accounts. The draft notice for the College Savings Account Research Demonstration Project outlines a plan for providing 10,000 ninth-grade students and their parents with college savings accounts, financial incentives to save and targeted financial counseling.

Because many GEAR UP grantees may be more readily able to establish and manage savings accounts for GEAR UP students, the Department is proposing that state GEAR UP grantees that received new awards in FY 2011 or FY 2012 and that are participating in the cohort model would be eligible to apply for the project. Each student will receive $200 in seed funding to start the account, which the state will open automatically. Students will have a chance to earn an extra $10 per month in a dollar-for-dollar savings match program over the next four years, ultimately giving them the opportunity to save more than $1,000 for college. Savings will be available for students to use for educational expenses upon enrolling in an institution of higher education.

For more information on the project, including a copy of the Notice of Proposed Priorities, visit:http://www2.ed.gov/programs/gearup/applicant.html.

New START Treaty Aggregate Numbers of Strategic Offensive Arms

New START Treaty Aggregate Numbers of Strategic Offensive Arms

HUMMINGBIRD FOOD SUPPLY WITHERS AWAY

Photo Credit:  U.S. Fish And Wildlife Service.
FROM:  NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
Where Have All the Hummingbirds Gone?
May 30, 2012
The glacier lily as it's called, is a tall, willowy plant that graces mountain meadows throughout western North America. It flowers early in spring, when the first bumblebees and hummingbirds appear.

Or did.
The lily, a plant that grows best on subalpine slopes, is fast becoming a hothouse flower. In Earth's warming temperatures, its first blooms appear some 17 days earlier than they did in the 1970s, scientists David Inouye and Amy McKinney of the University of Maryland and colleagues have found.

The problem, say the biologists, with the earlier timing of these first blooms is that the glacier lily is no longer synchronized with the arrival of broad-tailed hummingbirds, which depend on glacier lilies for nectar.

By the time the hummingbirds fly in, many of the flowers have withered away, their nectar-laden blooms going with them.

Broad-tailed hummingbirds migrate north from Central America every spring to high-mountain breeding sites in the western United States. The birds have only a short mountain summer to raise their young. Male hummingbirds scout for territories before the first flowers bloom.

But the time between the first hummingbird and the first bloom has collapsed by 13 days over the past four decades, say Inouye and McKinney. "In some years," says McKinney, "the lilies have already bloomed by the time the first hummingbird lands."

The biologists calculate that if current trends continue, in two decades the hummingbirds will miss the first flowers entirely.

The results are reported in a paper in the current issue of the journal Ecology. In addition to McKinney and Inouye, co-authors of the paper are Paul CaraDonna of the University of Arizona; Billy Barr of the Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory in Crested Butte, Colo.; David Bertelsen of the University of Arizona; and Nickolas Waser, affiliated with all three institutions.

"Northern species, such as the broad-tailed hummingbird, are most at risk of arriving at their breeding sites after their key food resources are no longer available, yet ecologists predict that species will move northward as climate warms," says Saran Twombly, program director in the National Science Foundation's Division of Environmental Biology, which funded the research.

"These conflicting pressures challenge society to ensure that species don't soon find themselves without a suitable place to live."

Broad-tailed hummingbirds that breed farther south have fewer challenges.
"In Arizona, for example," says Inouye, "there's no obvious narrowing of the timing between the first arriving males and the first blooms of, in this case, the nectar-containing Indian paintbrush."

Higher latitudes may be more likely to get out of sync ecologically because global warming is happening fastest there.

As the snow continues to melt earlier in the spring, bringing earlier flowering, says Inouye, the mountains may come alive with glacier lilies long before hummingbirds can complete their journey north.
"Where have all the flowers gone?" then will be "where have all the hummingbirds gone?"

CHAIRMAN CFTC COMMENTS ON PROPOSED VOLKER RULE TO CURB FINANCIAL RISKS

FROM:  COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION
Statement Regarding Public Roundtable to Discuss the Proposed Volcker Rule
Chairman Gary Gensler
May 31, 2012
Welcome to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) roundtable on the proposed Volcker Rule. Thank you, Dan, for that introduction, and thank you for working with the rest of the team, particularly Steven Seitz from your office and Steve Kane from the Office of the Chief Economist, to put together this important roundtable.

I’d like to thank the Treasury Department staff and the staff of the financial regulators tasked with implementing the Volcker Rule for joining us for this roundtable and for your efforts in coordinating with the CFTC on the rule. I’d also like to thank Sheila Bair, the former Chair of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, for participating today.

Former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker was unfortunately on international travel today, but I’d like to acknowledge his many years of public service.

In 2008, the financial system and the financial regulatory system failed. The crisis – caused in part by the unregulated swaps market -- plunged the United States into the worst recession since the Great Depression with eight million Americans losing their jobs, millions of families losing their homes and thousands of small businesses closing their doors. The financial storms continue to reverberate with the debt crisis in Europe affecting the economic prospects of people around the globe.

In 2010, Congress and the President came together to pass the historic Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act), to promote transparency in the markets and to lower risk to the public from large, complex financial institutions. Amongst these protections is the Volcker Rule, which prohibits banking entities from proprietary trading, an activity that may put taxpayers at risk.

This is the CFTC’s 17th roundtable on important topics related to Dodd-Frank reforms. These roundtables are an additional opportunity – beyond the 30,000 comments we’ve received and 1,600 meetings with the public we’ve held -- for dialogue and helpful input from market participants and the public. Our 18th roundtable related to promoting the price discovery function on designated contract markets and related issues of swap execution facilities will be on June 5.

In adopting the Volcker rule, Congress prohibited banking entities from proprietary trading while at the same time permitting banking entities to engage in certain activities, such as market making and risk mitigating hedging. One of the challenges in finalizing this rule is achieving these multiple objectives.

I’m looking forward to a lively discussion. I’d like to highlight three main issues that I’m particularly interested in getting feedback on today.

First, as prescribed by Congress, the Volcker rule prohibits proprietary trading while permitting risk-mitigating hedging. These two provisions are consistent with each other in that they are both meant to lower the risks of banking entities to the broader public. The question is how we as regulators achieve both of these risk-lowering provisions in a balanced way.

Some commenters have said if we’re too prohibitive in one area, we may limit banking entities ability to engage in risk-mitigating hedging. On the other hand, if we follow comments of some of the banking entities, then the rule’s allowance for permitted hedging might swallow up Congress’ intent to limit the risk of proprietary trading.

Specifically, under the statute, banking entities may engage in “risk-mitigating hedging activities in connection with and related to individual or aggregated positions, contracts, or other holdings.”

To qualify as hedging, these activities must be “designed to reduce the specific risks to the banking entity in connection with and related to such positions, contracts, or other holdings.”

The criteria for the hedging exemption as included in the proposed Volcker Rule are the following: hedges must mitigate one or more specific risks on either individual positions or aggregated positions, they cannot generate significant new exposures, they must be subject to continuous monitoring and management, compensation for hedging cannot reward proprietary trading, and the hedges must be reasonably correlated to the specific risks of the positions.

A further question about hedging activity that was asked by the agencies ( question 109 of the CFTC’s proposal) is whether “certain hedging strategies or techniques that involve hedging the risk of aggregated positions (e.g. portfolio hedging) create the potential for abuse of the hedging exemption.”

A related question on which it would be helpful to hear from the panel: is it possible, and if so how, could a separate trading desk with its own profit and loss statement engage in risk-mitigating hedges?

The further removed hedging activities are from the specific positions the banking entity intends to hedge, is it not more likely that such trading activity is prone to express something other than hedging?

As Dan will explain in a moment, we’re not going to be speaking about the specifics of the credit derivative product trading of JPMorgan Chase’s Chief Investment Office. I do think, though, it may be instructive for regulators as we finalize key reforms.

Second, in addition to hedging, Dodd-Frank permits market making, which is important to well-functioning markets as well as to the economy. The question for regulators once again is finding a balance, but this time between prohibiting proprietary trading and permitting market making. The agencies ask in the proposal (question 89 in the CFTC’s proposal): “Is the proposed exemption overly broad or narrow? For example, would it encompass activity that should be considered proprietary trading under the proposed rule?”

The criteria for market making in the proposed rule included seven requirements. A number of commenters suggested that these requirements may be more applicable to the listed securities markets than to the swaps market. During the second panel today, we are looking for your input on this issue. If some of these requirements are not appropriate, what would be more appropriate with regard to market making in swaps?

Third, I’m particularly interested in hearing about how the prohibition on proprietary trading should best be applied to banking entities transacting in futures and swaps. The CFTC’s role with regard to the Volcker Rule and banking entities is primarily with regard to these derivatives traded by swap dealers and futures commission merchants within the banking entity.

In particular, banking entities’ market making in swaps is likely to leave them with significant open positions for many years in customized swaps. When would a banking entity’s decision not to hedge or to only partially hedge open swaps positions be considered prohibited proprietary trading? We at the CFTC will benefit from your input on how the Volcker Rule can best protect the public against risk in the swaps and futures markets.

Thank you again for coming, and I’ll turn it back to Dan.

COMMANDER U.S. STRATEGIC COMMAND'S REMARKS ON NATION'S NUCLEAR STRATEGIC FORCE .

Photo:  Missile Tracker.  Credit:  U.S. Navy.
FROM:  AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE
By Army Sgt. 1st Class Tyrone C. Marshall Jr.
WASHINGTON, May 30, 2012 - Air Force Gen. Robert Kehler, commander of U.S. Strategic Command, described the shaping of the nation's nuclear strategic force in the current global environment during remarks at the Council on Foreign Relations here today.

"Really, of all the important mission responsibilities assigned to the United States Strategic Command by the president, none is more important than our responsibility to deter a strategic attack on the United States and our allies and partners," Kehler said.

Deterrence and assurance "have been part of the national lexicon for well over half a century, and for many of those decades, strategic deterrence focused solely on leveraging U.S. nuclear capabilities to deter a massive nuclear or conventional attack on the U.S. or our allies," he said.

Kehler noted the era of "one size fits all" deterrence passed with the end of the Cold War. In today's world, some regimes, such as those in North Korea and Iran, as well as terrorist groups are said to be seeking to acquire nuclear arms and possibly other weapons of mass destruction.

"Strategic deterrence and assurance remain relevant concepts today, but we are shaping those concepts toward a broader array of individual actors, each with their own unique context," the general explained. What Kehler called tailored deterrence requires a deeper and more comprehensive understanding of today's multi-faceted threats and the decision-making processes of threatening regimes and groups.

"To be sure, deterrence is still fundamentally about influencing an actor's decisions," Kehler said. "It is about a solid policy foundation, it is about credible capabilities, it is about what the U.S. and our allies, as a whole, can bring to bear in both a military and non-military sense."

Kehler pointed out deterrence planning and forces must fit today's unique global security environment, which he described as an enormously complex and uncertain world that includes nuclear weapons and nuclear armed states "where several of those nuclear armed states are modernizing both their arsenals and their delivery systems," he added. "The threat of proliferation of nuclear weapons and delivery systems, the growing potential for disruption or attack through cyberspace and the danger of weapons of mass destruction in the hands of violent extremists."

Kehler said this is the context for today's nuclear deterrence and pointed to the Nuclear Posture Review which recognized the need to maintain a capable force and modern infrastructure for as long as nuclear weapons exist.

The general quoted the remarks of former Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates: "'As long as nuclear weapons exist, the United States must maintain a safe, secure and effective nuclear arsenal to maintain strategic stability with other major nuclear powers, deter potential adversaries, and reassure our allies and partners of our security commitments to them.'" The new U.S. defense strategy released in January contains similar language, Kehler said, but noted "This is not your father's nuclear-deterrent force."

The United States has witnessed an impressive 67-year period without nuclear use, Kehler said, noting the nation has regularly adjusted its nuclear capabilities to match U.S. national security needs in the global environment. Some of these adjustments made over the years, he said, include reduction of the number of ballistic missile submarines, conversion of four Ohio-class submarines to carry conventional cruise missiles, and affirmation of the B-1 bomber's non-nuclear role, among other changes.

"In total, our [nuclear weapons] stockpile is down 70 percent from the day the Berlin Wall fell. These are significant changes. At each decision point along the way, the U.S. carefully accounted for potential impacts on deterrent capability and strategic stability," he added.

Kehler said the end result is a smaller force still capable of deterring adversaries and assuring allies of U.S. capability to maintain strategic stability in a future crisis. He also noted President Barack Obama's Fiscal Year [2013] Budget "continues to sustain the essential investment to keep the nuclear deterrent force able and ready to do its job."

PENTAGON SAYS IRAN IS HELPING SYRIA AND AL-QAIDA HAS PRESENCE

Photo Credit:  U.S. Department of Defense  

FROM:  AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE

Pentagon: In Syria, Iran Helps Asad, al-Qaida Foments Violence

By Cheryl Pellerin

WASHINGTON, May 31, 2012 - In Syria, where Bashar al-Asad's government continues to massacre its population, Iran is supporting the regime and members of al-Qaida are in the country for their own purposes, Pentagon spokesman Navy Capt. John Kirby told reporters today.

"We remain deeply troubled and concerned by the ongoing violence in Syria and by the horrific acts of the Asad regime against its own people," Kirby told reporters at a Pentagon press briefing.

"And we certainly have seen reports and have reason to believe that Iran continues to assist the Asad regime in committing these acts of atrocities against the Syrian people," he added.

Other nations share that concern, the Pentagon spokesman said, and some are providing lethal assistance to opponents of the Syrian regime.

Kirby said defense officials have seen but cannot confirm reports that the Iranians are using commercial airliners to move arms into Syria.

"The larger issue here is that the Iranian regime, Tehran, continues to support, in tangible and intangible ways, the Asad regime," he added, "and that needs to stop."

At the White House, spokesman Jay Carney said the administration has been focused on the need to bring about a political transition in Syria sooner rather than later.

"The longer that Asad and his thugs are allowed to brutally murder the Syrian people, the more likely it becomes a sectarian civil war; the more likely that it spills over Syrian borders; the more likely that it transforms into a proxy war with different players," Carney said, "including ... Iran, which is already engaging in malignant behavior with regards to the Syrian situation, stepping up that kind of activity and not being alone in doing that."

What's happening in Syria, he added, "only underscores the urgent need to take action to prevent further devolution of the situation there, take action to support the process of political transition, to isolate and pressure Asad into taking himself out of power so that that transition can proceed."

At the Pentagon, Kirby said defense officials believe "al-Qaida has some presence inside Syria and interest in fomenting violence in Syria."

He added, "We do not believe they share the goals of the Syrian opposition or that they are even embraced by the opposition ... The sense that we get is that it is primarily members of [al-Qaida in Iraq] that are migrating into Syria."

Syria drew renewed world attention following a massacre May 25 of more than 100 people north of the city of Homs which international observers largely blamed on forces linked to the government.

U.S. policy on Syria is to work with international partners to put diplomatic and economic pressure on Damascus to help stem the humanitarian crisis.

The Defense Department supports the administration's position, Kirby said, while providing options to the nation's leaders for other potential responses.

"That's what we do and we would be irresponsible if we weren't thinking about options, whether or not they're called for, he said"

The military can be valuable in any number of scenarios, not all of which involve combat, Kirby added.

"The point is we're doing the prudent thing that we're supposed to do, which is to think through options. But we've not been called to present any," the Pentagon spokesman said.

"These are decisions that only the policymakers can make," Kirby said. "And again, we're supporting the commander in chief's intent, which is to keep the pressure on [the Asad regime] diplomatically and economically."

ATTORNEY GENERAL HOLDER SPEAKS TO CONFERENCE OF NATIONAL BLACK CHURCHES

Photo:  Attorney General Holder Holding A Press Conference.  Credit:  U.S. Department Of Justice. 
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Attorney General Eric Holder Speaks at the Conference of National Black Churches Annual Consultation Washington, D.C. ~ Wednesday, May 30, 2012
Thank you, Congressman Cleaver.   It is a privilege to join with you – and with Dr. Richardson and Dr. Burton – in opening the 2012 Consultation.   And I want to thank you for your kind words, for your leadership and partnership, and – of course – for your prayers.   Please, keep them coming.   Let me also thank the members and supporters of the Conference of National Black Churches and the Congressional Black Caucus for your work in bringing us all together today – and bringing renewed attention to the growing need to protect the voting rights of every eligible citizen.

It is a pleasure to be part of this discussion – and to be among so many friends, allies, and dedicated leaders.   I am grateful, in particular, for the opportunity to salute the important work that the people in this room are doing each day – all across the country – to enrich our communities and to improve lives.

Since its official establishment in 2009, CNBC’s efforts have reached more than 10 million people.   And, in partnership with the Congressional Black Caucus – a group that, over the last 40 years, has established itself as the “Conscience of Congress” – you have emerged as a powerful force for positive change.   Together, your organizations are not only providing a voice for the most vulnerable among us, you are shining a light on the problems we must solve and the promises that we must fulfill.

In so many different ways – in classrooms and courtrooms, in houses of worship and halls of justice, and in your own homes and neighborhoods – you are working to protect the progress that has marked our nation’s past, and to strengthen its future.   And your efforts honor America’s most noble and enduring cause – of security, opportunity, and justice for all.

Despite all that you’ve done to advance this cause – and the transformative progress that many of us have witnessed within our own lifetimes – as you know, this is no time to become complacent.   Yes, we have walked far on the long road toward freedom – but we have not yet reached the Promised Land.   And, in too many places, it’s painfully clear that our nation’s long struggle to overcome injustice, to eliminate disparities, to bridge long-standing divisions, to eradicate violence, and to uphold the civil rights of all citizens has not yet ended.

That means it is time, once again, to ask Dr. King’s most famous and enduring question: Where do we go from here?   It is time to consider – and to discuss – where we should focus our energies and where we must place our priorities.

Like many of you, I would argue that – of all the freedoms we enjoy today – none is more important, or more sacred, than the right to vote.   And I’m hardly the first to make such an assessment.   In July of 1965, when President Johnson signed the landmark Voting Rights Act into law, he proclaimed that, “the right to vote is the basic right, without which all others are meaningless.”

Today, as Attorney General, I have the privilege – and the solemn duty – of enforcing this law, and the other civil rights reforms that President Johnson, Dr. King, and so many other courageous leaders and activists once championed.   For our nation’s Department of Justice, and for our government and law enforcement partners across the country, this is among our highest priorities.   And it is evident in the historic progress that’s been made by this Administration – especially when it comes to expanding access to legal services; to combating hate crimes, community violence, and human trafficking; and to strengthening law enforcement efforts so that – in our workplaces and military bases; in our housing and lending markets; in our schools and places of worship; in our immigrant communities and our voting booths – the rights of all Americans are protected.

Our efforts honor the generations who have taken extraordinary risks, and willingly confronted hatred, bias, and ignorance – as well as billy clubs and fire hoses, bullets and bombs – to ensure that their children, and all citizens, would have the chance to participate in the work of their government.   And our efforts reflect the fact that the right to vote is not only the cornerstone of our system of government, it is – and always has been – the lifeblood of our democracy.   In fact,no force has proved more powerful – or more integral to the success of the great American experiment – than efforts to expand the franchise.

Despite this history, and despite our nation’s long tradition of extending voting rights – to non-property owners and women, to people of color and Native Americans, and to younger Americans – today, a growing number of our fellow citizens are worried about the same disparities, divisions, and problems that – nearly five decades ago – so many fought to address.  In my travels across this country, I’ve heard a consistent drumbeat of concern from citizens, who – often for the first time in their lives – now have reason to believe that we are failing to live up to one of our nation’s most noble ideals; and that some of the achievements that defined the civil rights movement now hang in the balance.

Congressman John Lewis may have described the reason for these concerns best, in a speech on the House floor last summer, when pointing out that the voting rights he worked throughout his life – and nearly gave his life – to ensure are, “under attack… [by] a deliberate and systematic attempt to prevent millions of elderly voters, young voters, students, [and] minority and low-income voters from exercising their constitutional right to engage in the democratic process.”   Not only was he referring to the all-too-common deceptive practices we’ve been fighting for years.    He was echoing more recent fears and frustrations about some of the state-level voting law changes we’ve seen this legislative season.

Let me assure you: for today’s Department of Justice, our commitment to strengthening – and to fulfilling – our nation’s promise of equal opportunity and equal justice has never been stronger.

Nowhere is this clearer than in current efforts to expand access to, and prevent discrimination in, our election systems.   We are dedicated to aggressively enforcing the Voting Rights Act – and to fulfilling our obligations under Section 2 and Section 5 of this vital law.

Under Section 2, which prohibits racially discriminatory practices that amount to either vote denial or vote dilution, we have opened a record number of new investigations – more than 100 in the last fiscal year.   We’ve also had success – without litigation – in encouraging voluntary improvements and compliance.

At the same time, Section 5 – which requires preclearance of proposed voting changes in parts or all of sixteen states where discrimination was deeply rooted – continues to be a critical tool in the protection of voting rights.   Under that important provision, certain “covered jurisdictions” are prevented from altering their voting practices until it can be determined that any proposed changes would have neither a discriminatory purpose nor effect.   This process, known as “preclearance,” has been a powerful tool in combating discrimination for decades.   And it has consistently enjoyed broad bipartisan support – including in its most recent reauthorization, when President Bush and an overwhelming Congressional majority came together in 2006 to renew the Act’s key provisions – and extend it until 2031.

Yet, in the six years since its reauthorization, Section 5 has increasingly come under attack by those who claim it’s no longer needed.   Between 1965 and 2010 – nearly half a century – only eight challenges to Section 5 were filed in court.   By contrast, over the last two years alone, we’ve seen no fewer than nine lawsuits contesting the constitutionality of that provision.   Four of these currently are in litigation.   Each of these challenges to Section 5 claims that we’ve attained a new era of electoral equality, that America in 2012 has moved beyond the challenges of 1965, and that Section 5 is no longer necessary.

I wish this were the case.   But the reality is that, in jurisdictions across the country, both overt and subtle forms of discrimination remain all too common – and have not yet been relegated to the pages of history.

As we’ve seen over the years, the Voting Rights Act – including Section 5 – consistently has been upheld in court.    In fact, several days ago, the D.C. Circuit rejected one of the latest challenges to Section 5, reaffirming its continued relevance as a cornerstone of civil rights law, and underscoring the fact that it remains critical in combating discrimination – and safeguarding essential voting rights that, for many Americans, now are at risk.

As you know – and have worked to draw attention to – the past two years have brought nearly two dozen new state laws and executive orders, from more than a dozen states, that could make it significantly harder for many eligible voters to cast ballots in 2012.    In response to some of these changes – in areas covered by Section 5 – the Justice Department has initiated careful, thorough, and independent reviews.   We’re now examining a number of redistricting plans in covered jurisdictions, as well as other types of changes to our election systems and processes – including changes to the procedures governing third-party voter registration organizations, to early voting procedures, and to photo identification requirements – to ensure that there is no discriminatory purpose or effect.  If a state passes a new voting law and meets its burden of showing that the law is not discriminatory, we will follow the law and approve the change.    And, as we have demonstrated repeatedly, when a jurisdiction fails to meet its burden of proving that a proposed voting change would not have a racially discriminatory effect – we will object, as we have in 15 separate cases since last September.

For example, in Texas, the Justice Department has argued that proposed redistricting plans for both the State House and the U.S. Congress are impermissible, based upon evidence suggesting that electoral maps were manipulated to give the appearance of minority control while minimizing minority electoral strength.   We argued – as we have successfully in the past – that this is precisely the type of discrimination that Section 5 was intended to block.   This case has been tried and we are now awaiting the court’s decision.

Unfortunately, electoral redistricting is far from the only area of concern in covered jurisdictions.    The recent wave of changes to state-level voter identification laws also has presented a number of problems requiring the Department’s attention.   In December, we objected to South Carolina’s voter ID law, after finding – based on the state’s own data – that the proposed change would place an unfair burden on non-white voters.   And this past March, we objected to a photo ID requirement in Texas because it would have had a disproportionate impact on Hispanic voters.

The Justice Department also is taking important steps to protect the voting rights of our men and women fighting overseas and our veterans returning home – as well as Americans living abroad, citizens with disabilities, college students, and language minorities.   Just a few days ago, we filed a lawsuit and proposed consent decree against the state of California to remedy the state’s failure to send absentee ballots on time to its overseas citizens and military voters for the state’s June 5th primary election.   This is the eighth such lawsuit the Department has filed in the last two years to protect the voting rights of service members and overseas citizens.   We also will continue working to enforce provisions like the “Motor Voter” law – and, to that end, have recently filed two lawsuits to increase access to registration opportunities.   In one of those cases, we reached a settlement with the State of Rhode Island that resulted in more voters being registered in the first full month after our lawsuit than in the entire previous two-year period.

In addition to these and other efforts to ensure access to the ballot box, we’re also working to uphold the integrity of our elections systems.   And, on this front, I want to be clear that no form of electoral fraud ever has been – or ever will be – tolerated by the United States government.

From my early days as a trial attorney in the Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section, I’ve been proud to stand on the front lines of this fight – and I fully understand the importance of investigating and prosecuting fraud cases whenever and wherever they arise.   I also know firsthand what so many studies and assessments have shown – that making voter registration easier is not likely, by itself, to make our elections more susceptible to fraud.   And while responsible parties on all sides of this debate have acknowledged that in-person voting fraud is uncommon – any allegation of its occurrence is, and will continue to be, taken seriously.

As we continue working to expand – and to protect – the voting franchise, we’re fortunate to have strong allies in the Congressional Black Caucus whose members – just a few months ago – introduced legislation which opposes any state election law that would disproportionately impact vulnerable communities.   We’re also privileged to have committed partners in, and beyond, this room who are – in a very real sense – the stewards of our democracy.   That means you have a critical responsibility to help identify and implement the most effective ways to safeguard the “most basic” of all American rights.   You have a thoughtful voice to add to discussions about voting access – what the struggle for freedom has long been about ensuring: the opportunity for citizens to voice their opinions, and – through the casting of their ballots – to signal their priorities and shape their own futures.   Since its earliest days, the American people have worked and fought for such a system.   And, now, with each of us – this fight goes on.   The progress we hold dear is in our hands.   And the democracy we hold sacred is our responsibility to carry forward.

In driving these efforts, I am privileged to count you as partners.   And I am grateful for the leadership, commitment, and courage you’ve shown in keeping faith in the promise of this nation – and in the power of what its people can achieve together.

Thank you.